# FedEx Agrees to STOP shipping tobacco



## plexiprs (Nov 18, 2005)

*FedEx makes deal with attorneys general to curb tobacco shipments*

February 8, 2006, 10:30 AM EST

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (AP) _ FedEx Corp. said it has reached an agreement with attorneys general in several states to further curb interstate shipments of cigarettes and other tobacco products.

The Memphis-based company, including its cargo airline FedEx Express and FedEx Ground, already prohibits tobacco sellers from shipping products to customers in the U.S., but under the new deal announced Tuesday FedEx agreed to take action against companies that repeatedly violate the policy.

That could include barring the violators from using FedEx services, according to the attorneys general.

The effort has been led by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, who has mounted a campaign to stop Internet sales of tobacco products that he says has cut into local and state tax revenues and makes it easier for them to get in the hands of minors.

Spitzer's office said Tuesday that FedEx *joins DHL, a unit of German postal service Deutsche Post AG, and Atlanta-based UPS Inc. in the agreement not to ship tobacco to U.S. customers.*

Last month Philip Morris USA, the nation's biggest tobacco company voluntarily agreed to end shipments of any of its products to customers, Indian tribes and enterprises that 37 states deem illegal.

*Last March major credit card companies agreed to stop processing payments from Internet retailers.*

========================

Anyone here seen an impact from this? I got a CBid shipment 2 weeks ago on DHL and yet to have a CC problem. Why can't our elected officials butt out of personal lives when we are harming no one and merely seeking some quality relaxation time??


----------



## PaulMac (Jul 15, 2003)

Its all about the Benjamins...tax revenue drives this kind of stuff, and not "keeping it out of the hands of children" as they constantly raise a hue and cry about. Requiring signatures keeps it out of the hands of children, banning shipments protects tax revenue. THATS why they won't stay out of it.


----------



## thebiglebowski (Dec 19, 2005)

PaulMac said:


> Its all about the Benjamins...tax revenue drives this kind of stuff, and not "keeping it out of the hands of children" as they constantly raise a hue and cry about. Requiring signatures keeps it out of the hands of children, banning shipments protects tax revenue. THATS why they won't stay out of it.


is this regarding interstate-related shipping or international? or both?


----------



## Jeff (Jan 2, 2005)

PaulMac said:


> Its all about the Benjamins...tax revenue drives this kind of stuff, and not "keeping it out of the hands of children" as they constantly raise a hue and cry about.


I understand that from the perspective of the states, but what I don't get is why the CC and shipping companies are so quick to voluntarily comply? There hasn't been any legislation yet to force them to comply.


----------



## Puro.Esq. (Feb 6, 2006)

> The effort has been led by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, who has mounted a campaign to stop Internet sales of tobacco products that he says has cut into local and state tax revenues and makes it easier for them to get in the hands of minors.


Oh I thougt it was only to curb smoking and keep children safe . . . now I see the PRIMARY reason is to generate tax revenue for the states. What a bunch of :BS They talk a good game about stopping bad habits and keeping minors from starting but I am sure they would all crap their pants if suddenly all smoking stopped and their pockets were not lined with all of our money.

More and more of our freedoms and being given away and usurped by our government "leaders". I am going to light one up tonight and the California Tobacco Taxes be damned!

END :sb


----------



## plexiprs (Nov 18, 2005)

FedEx U.S. Terms and Conditions




> Tobacco Products
> 
> Tobacco products will be accepted only when shipped from a licensed dealer or distributor to another licensed dealer or distributor. Packaging must be approved by FedEx Packaging Design and Development prior to shipping. The shipper is solely responsible for compliance with any applicable regulations, which may vary from state to state.
> 
> ...


UPS Shipping Terms and Conditions




> General Restrictions and Prohibitions
> 
> Shipper shall not tender to UPS any Tobacco Product Shipment that does not conform to the following general restrictions and prohibitions:
> 
> ...


----------



## PaulMac (Jul 15, 2003)

Jeff said:


> I understand that from the perspective of the states, but what I don't get is why the CC and shipping companies are so quick to voluntarily comply? There hasn't been any legislation yet to force them to comply.


Because I assume Fed-Ex or who-ever doesn't want Spitzer on the evening news talking about how Fed-Ex refuses to help voluntarily in the effort to keep tobacco out of our childrens hands...which is absolute :BS as far as the reason why, but the truth seldom matters when you have airtime does it.


----------



## ConMan (Dec 20, 2005)

I work in the Insurance industry. We know all too well about Mr. Spitzer. Once he digs his hands into something, he definitely changes it


----------



## PaulMac (Jul 15, 2003)

Prohibited articles are those listed in the FedEx Freight FXF 100 Rules Tariff. For shipments consigned to Europe, there are additional prohibited items. These include the following:

Ammunition, Metal scrap, Animal feed, Military Base Shipments, Animals, animal products or plants, *Military Equipment*, Exhibition material (convention deliveries), Motorized vehicles and cycles, Explosives, Perishables, Foodstuffs, Personal effects, Guns and firearms, Plastic scrap, Hazardous classes of 1 and 7, Residential deliveries, Hay/hay cubes, Shipments requiring credit card invoicing, Household goods/personal effects, Taxidermy items, *Liquor/tobacco*, Waste paper, Metals (precious), gems, Weapons or parts thereof.

Seeing as these items are prohibited...maybe we should start our own shipping company...
Call it Tipples, Tanks, and Tobacco!
Now I need to find some investors and a few trucks lol


----------



## colgate (Jan 18, 2005)

Puro.Esq. said:


> Oh I thougt it was only to curb smoking and keep children safe . . . now I see the PRIMARY reason is to generate tax revenue for the states. What a bunch of :BS They talk a good game about stopping bad habits and keeping minors from starting but I am sure they would all crap their pants if suddenly all smoking stopped and their pockets were not lined with all of our money.
> 
> More and more of our freedoms and being given away and usurped by our government "leaders". I am going to light one up tonight and the California Tobacco Taxes be damned!
> 
> END :sb


Kid lobbyists aren't in the same league with Altria. this is all about protecting markets and collecting taxes.


----------



## canadasmokes (Dec 20, 2005)

Well...What can brown do for you?


----------



## Jeff (Jan 2, 2005)

While doing my taxes this year on TurboTax, one of the last questions for my Pennsylvania state tax was if I needed to pay any tax on items bought outside of the state. These would be things such as cigars purchased from JR who don't collect the taxes.

I don't remember seeing this on last years tax forms, so I imagine PA added it this year. Makes me think it won't be long now before every online purchase is taxed.


----------



## par (May 22, 2005)

and USPS is next courtesy of a bill introduced by your favourite free trade public servant, rep. John M. McHugh (R-NY). He is proposing legislation to amend title 39 so that USPS cannot legally ship tobacco.

Isn't it great to know that the politicians across the aisle have joined forces to protect the citizens of the union?

One of the things i don't quite understand is how the politicians can argue that this is about protecting children when both UPS and fedex has programs in place for age verification for their wine shipping business?


----------



## palm55 (Jan 5, 2006)

PaulMac said:


> Prohibited articles are those listed in the FedEx Freight FXF 100 Rules Tariff. For shipments consigned to Europe, there are additional prohibited items. These include the following:
> 
> Ammunition, Metal scrap, Animal feed, Military Base Shipments, Animals, animal products or plants, *Military Equipment*, Exhibition material (convention deliveries), Motorized vehicles and cycles, Explosives, Perishables, Foodstuffs, Personal effects, Guns and firearms, Plastic scrap, Hazardous classes of 1 and 7, Residential deliveries, Hay/hay cubes, Shipments requiring credit card invoicing, Household goods/personal effects, Taxidermy items, *Liquor/tobacco*, Waste paper, Metals (precious), gems, Weapons or parts thereof.
> 
> So... Let me get this straight...  Pot, crack and smack are still good to go???


----------



## 12stones (Jan 6, 2006)

This is just falling in line with the government's attempts to put the control of tobacco under the FDA so they may put "restrictions on the sale and distribution of a tobacco product, including restrictions on the access to, and the advertising and promotion of, the tobacco product, if the Secretary determines that such regulation would be appropriate for the protection of the public health."

(Not that I'm saying that UPS, FedEx are in league with the gov't).

There are 2 bills in Congress currently being reviewed that will give the FDA control over the regulation of tobacco products. The main focus is on cigarettes but the "tobacco product" umbrella will include cigars as well.

The bills are (Senate) S.666 and (House) H.R.1376.

I'm sad to say that a Texas senator is a sponsor of the Senate bill.

EDIT: The House also has legislation working to control the mailing of tobacco so FedEx is just jumping the gun. House bill H.R. 2813 is currently being reviewed "to amend title 39, United States Code, to make cigarettes and certain other tobacco products nonmailable."


----------



## TideRoll (Nov 7, 2005)

par said:


> and USPS is next courtesy of a bill introduced by your favourite free trade public servant, rep. John M. McHugh (R-NY). He is proposing legislation to amend title 39 so that USPS cannot legally ship tobacco.
> 
> Isn't it great to know that the politicians across the aisle have joined forces to protect the citizens of the union?
> 
> One of the things i don't quite understand is how the politicians can argue that this is about protecting children when both UPS and fedex has programs in place for age verification for their wine shipping business?


Here we have a Republican who is basically trying to impose his idea of what is socially acceptable on the rest of us. He is no different in that regard than Hillary Clinton telling us that government knows better what is good for us than we do ourselves. George Wallace said some pretty crazy things in his political career, but he did say something which I unfortunately have to agree with from time to time, and that was that there was "not a dime's worth of difference" between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.

Although I am fairly conservative in a number of ways in terms of social policy, philosophically I feel a closer kinship with the fiscal conservatives, because the root of their philosophy is limited government and free markets (a combination which I personally believe will deliver the greatest amount of good to largest number of people while maintaining as much personal freedom for those people as is consistent with an orderly and fair society). In practical terms, at least as it relates to limited government and personal freedom, there is little effective difference between the desires of some social conservatives and liberals and socialists. They all want to impose their ideas of social policy on others under the color of government. And, no, this is not about making sure that atheists, agnostics and others never have the hear the word "God" (in my opinion, freedom of religion cannot be allowed to be slowly subverted against itself). It is about the basic concept of the role of government.

If the Republicans cannot show an effective difference between themselves and those they replaced, they themselves deserve to be gone. These guys and gals seem to have little appetite to turn the spending spigot down, and now some of them appear to have lost the distinction between themselves and Teddy Kennedy. Let the cycle go its own way, and a correction will be administered. Perhaps the Republic will survive long enough for the message to sink in; it has before.


----------



## Nely (Nov 11, 2004)

Fedex sucks anyways, the only people who actually have a little of work ethic besides the USPS is UPS.


----------



## 12stones (Jan 6, 2006)

Nely said:


> Fedex sucks anyways, the only people who actually have a little of work ethic besides the USPS is UPS.


It won't matter who has a good work ethic if they're not able to mail any tobacco anyway.


----------



## Cartierusm (Jan 25, 2005)

WHAT ****ING PISSED ME OFF IS NOT FEDEX REFUSING TO SEND TABACCO SHIPMENTS BUT THE CREDIT CARD COMPANIES. This is an invasion of privacy of the worst kind who says they have a right to regulate what I buy **** THEM!!!!! My statement should be private even to themselves, they have no right telling what I can and can't buy. THEY ARE NOT THE POLICE, IF I WANT TO PURCHASE SOMETHING ILLEGAL THAT'S MY RIGHT, Next thing you know they won't let you purchase medication with a credit card because the credit card company is owned by a Christian Scientist. No offense to christian scientists, my best friend is one, I just was trying to make an analogy. I don't even have the words to describe the injustices that are happening in our country, Russia's looking pretty good right about now. 1984 is not coming it's here...some company developed a chip that is embedded in your driver's license to track where you are at all times, of course unless you leave the stupid thing at home, I'm sure this will never happen but that someone is even developing the technology. I mean if you're going to develop the technology why broadcast it as a device for a driver's license why not something else more benign.


----------



## Dr. Stogie Fresh (Nov 18, 2005)

I just got a notice today from Cbid that DHL is bringing me my last purchase. But, maybe we should stock up for the long winter ahead. 

Doc


----------



## (909) (Jul 27, 2004)

Dr. Stogie Fresh said:


> I just got a notice today from Cbid that DHL is bringing me my last purchase. But, maybe we should stock up for the long winter ahead.
> 
> Doc


I'm thinking the same thing. Would it make sense to buy a larger humidor and stock up on smokes. What if it dries up for a while?


----------



## palm55 (Jan 5, 2006)

My understanding (and it may not be correct) is that here in Michigan, the state has already devised a way to collect sin taxes on internet purchases of cigarrettes. Apparently, last year, those who purchased cartons of the paper sticks online were sent a tax bill.

Of course, the tax is quite cut-and-dried, based on "per pack." I don't know how they were able to track the purchases, if indeed they did. Nor do I know how cigars are taxed here.

Perhaps there are some fellow Miciganians here who could shed some more knowledgable light???


----------



## JAG (Nov 23, 2005)

This is just a bunch of BULL$#&@ !! 10X :c 
I am just appalled at all these senators imposing their views and morals
on us. You sir do not speak for me and stop trying to run my life and telling
me what is good/bad for me. These people make me sick...
I can't believe how fedex just crumbled under the pressure of these idiots.
I guess my weekend is going to be a smoke out with lotsa drinks. 

:al


----------



## mikey202 (Dec 29, 2005)

PaulMac said:


> Because I assume Fed-Ex or who-ever doesn't want Spitzer on the evening news talking about how Fed-Ex refuses to help voluntarily in the effort to keep tobacco out of our childrens hands...which is absolute :BS as far as the reason why, but the truth seldom matters when you have airtime does it.


you hit the nail right on the head!!It's all about public image and money!! What's funny to me is the fact that one of my orders from Cbid was delivered by UPS and guess what..my 14 year old was the one who got the package from the driver.I work for Fedex as a courier and its all about the bottom line...$$$$$.I need to stop here ..I feel a Rant coming on.


----------



## TypeO- (Jan 4, 2006)

I wonder if the new rules imposed by Fedex and UPS are just to appease the lawmakers. Who's to say what's in the box? Are they simply not going to carry ANYTHING from a tobacco merchant who also happens to sell accessories, humidors, etc.?


----------



## Dr. Stogie Fresh (Nov 18, 2005)

(909) said:


> I'm thinking the same thing. Would it make sense to buy a larger humidor and stock up on smokes. What if it dries up for a while?


I'm starting to feel like a survivalist: shore up guns, ammo, food supplies...... and cigars! :bx

Then hide out in a hole in the ground, put barbed wire around my property and keep out signs. And surveillance systems, and big dogs, and..... somebody slap me.

The Doc


----------



## Poriggity (Dec 8, 2005)

Thats very interesting, considering I used to work for fed ex, and I had a tobacco shop that was a regular stop on my route, that constantly got boxes of chewing tobacco.. Glad I don't work for them anymore.
Scott


----------



## plexiprs (Nov 18, 2005)

Dr. Stogie Fresh said:


> I'm starting to feel like a survivalist: shore up guns, ammo, food supplies...... and cigars! :bx
> 
> Then hide out in a hole in the ground, put barbed wire around my property and keep out signs. And surveillance systems, and big dogs, and..... somebody slap me.
> 
> The Doc


With that in mind I'm uping my box count of reserves to 100!!!!!!


----------



## c2000 (Oct 16, 2003)

Its always about the money and in spitzers case its about political ambition..

Adult whiners always use kids to leverage their complaints..These whining zealots aren't worried about anything or anybody except their compulsive causes..
Jerry in Minnesota


----------



## palm55 (Jan 5, 2006)

I agree with most of what's already been said... I guess my concern is, "What's next?"

It seems that we should try to keep on top of what's going on, if nothing else. Plex opened a thread that (IMHO) should be revisited and updated over the coming weeks and months.


----------



## larryinlc (Oct 22, 2005)

I gotta believe if we continue down this path, the cigar e-tailers will be hit pretty hard too. They certainly rely heavily on internet commerce. What a dilemma for them....can sell cigars, but no way to deliver them. Me, I buy over the net for price and selection. Can't get many of my usual smokes locally.

Larry


----------



## Mr. White (Dec 4, 2004)

Jeff said:


> I understand that from the perspective of the states, but what I don't get is why the CC and shipping companies are so quick to voluntarily comply? There hasn't been any legislation yet to force them to comply.


The Bush administration and the CC companies have climbed into bed together in recent years. I'm not totally sure what the Bush administration is getting out of it? But I know the CC companies have become exempt for people filing for bankruptcy, and just recently I've heard that our government sanctioned the CC's to double the required minimum payments on cards in an effort to make people pay off their cards sooner.

I read a report recently about americans and their CC debt. heh, it wasn't good. And in Fact, one of my wife's aunts is now in deep doodoo because all her card minimum payments got doubled. Just on 2 cards alone she's now having to pay $700.00 a month instead of $350.00. She's having to seek credit counselling. hehe.

While I agree that bankruptcy is a bad thing, and it should have had stricter laws in place to deter people from filing, I wonder what the point of bankruptcy is now. lol. I guess there's always medical bills, but I have a feeling they'll become exempt as well, if they haven't already.

My guess is the CC companies are complying with this stuff in return for the new stuff they're getting in return.

Anyway, It's pretty typical, bush is pushing the legal boundaries of what he can do every day now. If you want privacy, you might want to move to England or Canada. Sooner or later our banks and CC companies will be handing over our monthly statements to the IRS for taxation. It's just a matter of time.


----------



## KnightKrusher (Jan 4, 2006)

Yes our government at it's best . Pass a law make them stop, or make them pay.:tg


----------



## palm55 (Jan 5, 2006)

larryinlc said:


> I gotta believe if we continue down this path, the cigar e-tailers will be hit pretty hard too. They certainly rely heavily on internet commerce. What a dilemma for them....can sell cigars, but no way to deliver them. Me, I buy over the net for price and selection. Can't get many of my usual smokes locally.
> 
> Larry


Good point... And so... I'll give a try at getting in touch with a few of the e-commerce cigar folks. I'd like to get their input!


----------



## JOMAC (Jan 28, 2006)

TideRoll said:


> Here we have a Republican who is basically trying to impose his idea of what is socially acceptable on the rest of us. He is no different in that regard than Hillary Clinton telling us that government knows better what is good for us than we do ourselves. George Wallace said some pretty crazy things in his political career, but he did say something which I unfortunately have to agree with from time to time, and that was that there was "not a dime's worth of difference" between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.
> 
> Although I am fairly conservative in a number of ways in terms of social policy, philosophically I feel a closer kinship with the fiscal conservatives, because the root of their philosophy is limited government and free markets (a combination which I personally believe will deliver the greatest amount of good to largest number of people while maintaining as much personal freedom for those people as is consistent with an orderly and fair society). In practical terms, at least as it relates to limited government and personal freedom, there is little effective difference between the desires of some social conservatives and liberals and socialists. They all want to impose their ideas of social policy on others under the color of government. And, no, this is not about making sure that atheists, agnostics and others never have the hear the word "God" (in my opinion, freedom of religion cannot be allowed to be slowly subverted against itself). It is about the basic concept of the role of government.
> 
> If the Republicans cannot show an effective difference between themselves and those they replaced, they themselves deserve to be gone. These guys and gals seem to have little appetite to turn the spending spigot down, and now some of them appear to have lost the distinction between themselves and Teddy Kennedy. Let the cycle go its own way, and a correction will be administered. Perhaps the Republic will survive long enough for the message to sink in; it has before.


hell yea, i agree!!!


----------



## Mindflux (Dec 5, 2005)

Jokieman said:


> I read a report recently about americans and their CC debt. heh, it wasn't good. And in Fact, one of my wife's aunts is now in deep doodoo because all her card minimum payments got doubled. Just on 2 cards alone she's now having to pay $700.00 a month instead of $350.00. She's having to seek credit counselling. hehe.


I kept hearing about CC minimum's doubling.. yet none of mine did. I'm curious as to why?


----------



## Danimal (Jun 6, 2004)

why those little mother...


----------



## cigar no baka (Sep 7, 2005)

None of this surprises me. There are amazing parallels between Prohibition and the current anti-smoking movement. I read a very good book on Prohibition and I was shocked and appalled.


----------



## colgate (Jan 18, 2005)

One day, heck today is the day, we'll look back on the late 90's early 00's as a very free time in our lives. Music was free, searches were unfiltered, tobacco and other stuff we could never lay our hands on because of geography suddenly became accessible. Then the government and businesses caught up and shut the door on this freedom. You'll probably be expected to pay tax on searches and what not before it's a done deal. By the time our generation passes it will be assumed to have always been that way (for $$).

bleh.


----------



## Jeff (Jan 2, 2005)

colgate said:


> You'll probably be expected to pay tax on searches and what not before it's a done deal. By the time our generation passes it will be assumed to have always been that way (for $$).


Wouldn't be surprised to start paying taxes on email in a few years.


----------



## Smokin-Pepperoni (Jan 16, 2006)

PaulMac said:


> Its all about the Benjamins...tax revenue drives this kind of stuff, *and not "keeping it out of the hands of children" as they constantly raise a hue and cry about.* Requiring signatures keeps it out of the hands of children, banning shipments protects tax revenue. THATS why they won't stay out of it.


Yo exactly what I was thinking when I read that. They don't really care about the kids, they want the money from the tax revenues, as Paul said. They're a bunch of fat cat capitalists.

Peace...:al


----------



## herwood38 (Feb 13, 2006)

Yeah i agree that that is a bunch of :BS. It ticks me off that the government wont keep their hands off the economy like they should. The more the government steps in the more we become a socialist economy. The Founding Fathers would be turning in their graves.


----------



## PaulMac (Jul 15, 2003)

Smokin-Pepperoni said:


> Yo exactly what I was thinking when I read that. They don't really care about the kids, they want the money from the tax revenues, as Paul said. They're a bunch of fat cat capitalists.
> 
> Peace...:al


I must be doing something wrong if I making sense and being listened to lol


----------



## Nely (Nov 11, 2004)

Nely said:


> Fedex sucks anyways, the only people who actually have a little of work ethic besides the USPS is UPS.





12stones said:


> It won't matter who has a good work ethic if they're not able to mail any tobacco anyway.


Really? You don't get many packages do you?


----------



## Gurkha (Oct 1, 2005)

All we have left for mailorders is USPS, and I bet they stop shipping tobacco products soon.


----------



## Eternal Rider (Feb 27, 2006)

Jeff said:


> While doing my taxes this year on TurboTax, one of the last questions for my Pennsylvania state tax was if I needed to pay any tax on items bought outside of the state. These would be things such as cigars purchased from JR who don't collect the taxes.
> 
> I don't remember seeing this on last years tax forms, so I imagine PA added it this year. Makes me think it won't be long now before every online purchase is taxed.


When I did my taxes with Tubo-Tax this year they asked me the same thing on my Kansas return like I am going to to say I did. They didn't ask that question last year. Maybe they are trying to cover their ass.


----------



## tech-ninja (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeff said:


> While doing my taxes this year on TurboTax, one of the last questions for my Pennsylvania state tax was if I needed to pay any tax on items bought outside of the state. These would be things such as cigars purchased from JR who don't collect the taxes.
> 
> I don't remember seeing this on last years tax forms, so I imagine PA added it this year. Makes me think it won't be long now before every online purchase is taxed.





Eternal Rider said:


> When I did my taxes with Tubo-Tax this year they asked me the same thing on my Kansas return like I am going to to say I did. They didn't ask that question last year. Maybe they are trying to cover their ass.


It has always been on the actual form that SC puts out, I am not sure when the tax software started asking for it.
I was told by a CPA that I should start putting something down. From what he said, if I never put anything down then the statute of limitations never got set and they could go back farther than 7 years.

Who knows. My head hurts just thinking about reading tax laws. u


----------



## tech-ninja (Mar 27, 2006)

herwood38 said:


> Yeah i agree that that is a bunch of :BS. It ticks me off that the government wont keep their hands off the economy like they should. The more the government steps in the more we become a socialist economy. The Founding Fathers would be turning in their graves.


That's the truth. If we could harness the energy of them rolling in their graves we would have an unlimited energy source.


----------



## The Master (Dec 26, 2004)

I am still receiving cigar shipments from overseas. Hopefully they will not disallow this practice.


----------



## vic_c (Sep 7, 2005)

What a bunch of :BS !!
I have heard of people having problems with Fedex shipping wine across state lines as well! It's really getting out of hand!:c


----------

